Politics

[beautyfromashes]

But what kind of shelter are they offering? If Mahan is proposing to put people in real homes, then great, but I suspect he's just talking about large, centralized shelters with dozens of beds to a room. People reject those shelters for a lot of perfectly legitimate reasons, including that they can be violent places in their own right. The idea that people "choose" to be homeless is bullshit. A shelter is not a home, and the people who avail themselves of a shelter bed are still homeless. Giving people the "choice" between a literal jail or a shelter that is in many ways effectively a jail is not a real choice. People who choose the street over a shelter bed aren't "choosing" homelessness -- homelessness has been thrust upon them and they are choosing from a menu of all shitty options, all of which still entail their being homeless. If an elected official wants to talk about "holding people accountable," he ought to hold himself accountable for coming up with a real solution to this problem instead of using the threat of jail to sweep it under the rug so that people can just pretend the issue doesn't really exist.

I agree with you. Shelters need to be a safe space and there has to be control over those who are violent to themselves and others. They also need to be a step towards something better. They can't just be holding places forever. Drug treatment needs to be provided along with medical care and supervision for those with mental health issues. But it's disingenuous to think that there is no violence on the streets either. And many people choose the streets because they want to choose to live in a lifestyle that is not allowed in a shelter. Allowing that to continue is inhumane. And just putting someone in an apartment so they can shoot up there instead of on the street is not a solution. We need to have both resources and accountability.

[Belvidere]

But what kind of shelter are they offering? If Mahan is proposing to put people in real homes, then great, but I suspect he's just talking about large, centralized shelters with dozens of beds to a room. People reject those shelters for a lot of perfectly legitimate reasons, including that they can be violent places in their own right. The idea that people "choose" to be homeless is bullshit. A shelter is not a home, and the people who avail themselves of a shelter bed are still homeless. Giving people the "choice" between a literal jail or a shelter that is in many ways effectively a jail is not a real choice. People who choose the street over a shelter bed aren't "choosing" homelessness -- homelessness has been thrust upon them and they are choosing from a menu of all shitty options, all of which still entail their being homeless. If an elected official wants to talk about "holding people accountable," he ought to hold himself accountable for coming up with a real solution to this problem instead of using the threat of jail to sweep it under the rug so that people can just pretend the issue doesn't really exist.

Since we have been grappling with this for years and live near services, I can offer what we see:

1. UMKC's Center for Nonprofit Leadership did a great analysis of homelessness in KC. I tried to find it again and couldn't. If anyone can find the report, please post it. It showed the complexity of homelessness, how it's on a spectrum of issues and challenges, and how Kansas City has not responded with a comprehensive system.

In fairness, most cities don't have the resources to tackle it without federal help: that's part of the reason not having a social safety net is so problematic. Living close to a state line makes it even harder from a regional perspective. Everybody's expecting Kansas City (and KCK) to solve it.

Also, to be honest, our philanthropic community likes bright and shiny projects and they're not going to put money towards solving this. I know civic leaders who have tried recently. No interest.

2. I agree warehousing people isn't working. It's for a crisis or short term, but not viable if you want people to accept help. It's not safe or peaceful, although there are things you can do to create a calm environment.

Shelter KC has a nice expansion project with this non-congregate model.

3. For lack of a better term, there is an industry built around serving homeless people instead of solving homelessness. They have ended up sustaining chronic homelessness. Volunteers love to pass out food and supplies. Will they go back home and support public housing or local shelters? Very few will.

Every non-profit does their own thing. On the one hand, I get it. They are private and want to do it their way. On the other hand, if you were homeless and trying to navigate this cluster, God help you.

It's inefficient, with a lot of duplicated overhead and, in many respects, unregulated and discriminatory. Some of these charities are awesome and honest, doing amazing work on a tight budget. Some of them are not. If their board doesn't hold them accountable, who does? Veterans groups have done a better job of oversight and inspection, but that's limited.

4. We are experiencing an awful stalemate right now.

Some encampments are within sight of shelters. Not only do they reject services, they prey on real homeless folks. It got so bad, Hope Faith asked them to move this week. These are addicts, dealers, traffickers. Outsiders bringing in supplies don't realize they are sustaining predators.

Meanwhile, affordable housing is burning down. Neighborhoods can't cope with dangerous people living in alleys and breaking into buildings. I know a lady who was kind to a homeless man one day and he's been stalking her for years. She has no way of getting a restraining order or the like. We had to deal with people squatting on property owned by an elderly couple--they are always kind and give out food. The squatters extorted money by threatening to burn their house down, and they are too scared to call the police, knowing the men will be processed and released, if they get arrested at all.

5. What we need, but I don't know how to accomplish.

- Low barrier non-congregate shelter and services in every District. Make it predictable and professional, like an emergency room.
- Federal investment in housing. Such housing needs to be everywhere, not concentrated, and high quality. It should look like market rate and be well managed. They can't do that if HUD is underfunded.
- Restoration of a safety net.
- Increased wages.
- Universal healthcare, including mental health and addiction.
- Much better and reformed housing authority. Understand how it can create dependency, especially for families trying to stay together. Help people adjust. (Our housing authority also has, or had, the highest rate of eviction of all landlords.)
- A modern jail has robust diversion, offering services and support instead of incarceration. They supervise, not punish.

6. This goes back to transparency. If you can't trust the city, and their public engagement is absent, or dishonest, then nobody works together.

[beautyfromashes]

3. For lack of a better term, there is an industry built around serving homeless people instead of solving homelessness. They have ended up sustaining chronic homelessness. Volunteers love to pass out food and supplies.

I don't agree with all of your prescription, but this is so truthful. People "being nice" and handing out food and supplies and leaving is not helpful. And groups that are part of an industry, as you say, instead of a solution is borderline evil. There has to be a full team of services or it doesn't help with the underlying problem. I probably would push more to have people forcefully removed from living on the street, but there has to be something to move them to that is hopeful and pragmatic. Right now, we don't really have that and the problem is that the longer someone lives on the street the harder it is to pull them out to a good life. We have a growing population that I worry would never make the effort to get off the street, no intention of changing their life for the better and the longer we don't have a solution, the worse it will become. It's already a huge detriment to the urban core and will become more so. But, city leaders seem lost.

[Belvidere]

3. For lack of a better term, there is an industry built around serving homeless people instead of solving homelessness. They have ended up sustaining chronic homelessness. Volunteers love to pass out food and supplies.

I don't agree with all of your prescription, but this is so truthful. People "being nice" and handing out food and supplies and leaving is not helpful. And groups that are part of an industry, as you say, instead of a solution is borderline evil. There has to be a full team of services or it doesn't help with the underlying problem. I probably would push more to have people forcefully removed from living on the street, but there has to be something to move them to that is hopeful and pragmatic. Right now, we don't really have that and the problem is that the longer someone lives on the street the harder it is to pull them out to a good life. We have a growing population that I worry would never make the effort to get off the street, no intention of changing their life for the better and the longer we don't have a solution, the worse it will become. It's already a huge detriment to the urban core and will become more so. But, city leaders seem lost.

I don't have all the answers.

There is so much hidden homelessness in KC. Much of it is heartbreaking to witness. We have discovered people fleeing domestic violence with nothing but the clothes on their backs and their children. People go hungry because their food gets stolen, and neighbors pitch in. I have seen one woman off and on for 10 or so years, clearly mentally ill. I don't know how she survives. We can't communicate.

I don't believe one area, like Paseo West, can solve the social challenges of an entire region, but that's the plan.

KC is deeply hypocritical. They will give out supplies, donate money, then never support solutions where they live. They will insist it happens east of Troost or close by.

[Belvidere]

Found it.

https://info.umkc.edu/centers/wp-conten ... b-2024.pdf

[KCKev]

Url not found. What's going on? Here one minute gone the next. Must not be important.

[Belvidere]

Url not found. What's going on? Here one minute gone the next. Must not be important.

Try searching: UMKC, homelessness, paper.

UMKC WordPress
https://info.umkc.edu
PDF
A Report on the Homelessness Intervention Ecosystem of the Greater ...

I found one issued in 2023 and another in 2024.

[Belvidere]

The paper helped me to appreciate the complexity of homelessness.

It's tempting to blame people with difficult behaviors, which can be scary or frustrating, but they are different than people motivated by violence and crime who prey on everyone.

Our last group of dangerous squatters were in the latter category. Armed, aggressive, entitled, using drugs and breaking into other homes, and confronting neighbors. They had significant warrants out, which is why we were eventually able to get them removed. They were able to survive in part due to nearby services. I would never categorize them as typical homeless people.

The report examines the failure of having a "system" that is not a system at all. We don't ask enough of our collective politicians, funders, and providers. Can that even be done in our situation? It's an indictment of MARC to a degree. We are fragmented in so many respects. But the real fault is federal and state.

As a contrast: my husband's best friend had a breakdown last year, mentally and physically. He was a dual citizen, US and Germany, so we got him back to family. Within 2 months or so, he got free healthcare, interviews at psychiatric facilities to choose from, and a voucher to cover rent. He would also get help finding a job once he was better. If he had been living in Germany when this breakdown occurred, the support would have been faster.

As a society, we refuse to make this happen. The wealthiest country on the planet should be able to care for people.

***

From the report:

Kansas City has a few organizations that have begun to
engage in work that could be described as setting the stage for a more complete collective impact approach, but we have no evidence that suggests any organization serves as or has the capacity to serve as a backbone organization at this time. Further, it is debatable whether any program or organization has the will, political capital, resources, and functional capacity to do so. There are three organizations in the database that report operations in at least three or four of the functions relevant to a collective impact role in at least a large share of the region. A few others have an active presence in a few of the system functions, but their activities do not extend throughout the region or beyond those key but limited system functions.

The creation of a new program or organization could be another option, but this could only work if the homelessness intervention “community” of Greater Kansas City developed the political
interest and will to work together to grow something analogous to a collective impact or networked approach to addressing, region wide, the problem of homelessness. The current level
of “system” fragmentation likely works against options for taking a region-wide collective impact approach in the near-term future.

[im2kull]

This was badly managed from the get-go. I'm going to offer a forensic PR accounting.

The mayor should have intervened and told Platt to follow Hernandez's advice about communicating accurate details to the public. He should have counseled Platt that Hernandez had deep understanding of Kansas City because of his years as a journalist here; that he should rely on his advice navigating the terrain here. Lucas could have stopped the demotion and the lawsuit by doing this.

Both Platt and Lucas should have realized that a PIO that pushes back against them is their best friend in the long run -- because they keep them from making stupid mistakes and gaffes they don't see. If I were mayor, I'd want Micheal Mahoney as my PIO because I know he wouldn't let me get away with anything.

https://www.kmbc.com/news-team/4ed8e070 ... bdf52142e1

Platt acted immaturely in this entire debacle and it cost KC taxpayers almost $1 million.

Platt's mistake was not relying on Hernandez's years of relationships with other people in KC media. Hernandez probably knew journalists who would catch those lies and make a big story out of it, and he was seeking to avoid that from happening.

A PIO can smooth things over for public officials and refocus on their strengths and not their mistakes.

Hernandez also knows people in the neighborhoods and how things would fly. How misrepresenting things pisses them off, and how people like Belvidere spend time ferreting out discrepancies and mistruths.

As a resident, I have learned to not believe anything they publish, and check the facts and ask for details. I know that we have normalized spin from our politicians, but it's exhausting, especially when they are making important decisions.

Agreed. My opinion: Lucas didn't do that because Platt was doing exactly what he was hired to do. Lucas isn't dumb. Far from it. Because of the relationships I have now, I know things I would never put on this forum (as I am sure most of you avoid doing). It's public.

There are 2 more lawsuits in the pipeline. The city may appeal. I imagine they can offer Platt a buyout as well.

It's damaging and embarrassing.

3

[Belvidere]

This was badly managed from the get-go. I'm going to offer a forensic PR accounting.

The mayor should have intervened and told Platt to follow Hernandez's advice about communicating accurate details to the public. He should have counseled Platt that Hernandez had deep understanding of Kansas City because of his years as a journalist here; that he should rely on his advice navigating the terrain here. Lucas could have stopped the demotion and the lawsuit by doing this.

Both Platt and Lucas should have realized that a PIO that pushes back against them is their best friend in the long run -- because they keep them from making stupid mistakes and gaffes they don't see. If I were mayor, I'd want Micheal Mahoney as my PIO because I know he wouldn't let me get away with anything.

https://www.kmbc.com/news-team/4ed8e070 ... bdf52142e1

Platt acted immaturely in this entire debacle and it cost KC taxpayers almost $1 million.

Platt's mistake was not relying on Hernandez's years of relationships with other people in KC media. Hernandez probably knew journalists who would catch those lies and make a big story out of it, and he was seeking to avoid that from happening.

A PIO can smooth things over for public officials and refocus on their strengths and not their mistakes.

Hernandez also knows people in the neighborhoods and how things would fly. How misrepresenting things pisses them off, and how people like Belvidere spend time ferreting out discrepancies and mistruths.

Agreed. My opinion: Lucas didn't do that because Platt was doing exactly what he was hired to do. Lucas isn't dumb. Far from it. Because of the relationships I have now, I know things I would never put on this forum (as I am sure most of you avoid doing). It's public.

There are 2 more lawsuits in the pipeline. The city may appeal. I imagine they can offer Platt a buyout as well.

It's damaging and embarrassing.

3

Oy. Would you list them, cuz I've missed one.

[langosta]

The Dorch lawsuit will go to trial in October.

She previously sued her old employer (KCPS) for employment discrimination and lost. Appears she was ordered to pay KCPS’s legal fees and interest.

[im2kull]

This was badly managed from the get-go. I'm going to offer a forensic PR accounting.

The mayor should have intervened and told Platt to follow Hernandez's advice about communicating accurate details to the public. He should have counseled Platt that Hernandez had deep understanding of Kansas City because of his years as a journalist here; that he should rely on his advice navigating the terrain here. Lucas could have stopped the demotion and the lawsuit by doing this.

Both Platt and Lucas should have realized that a PIO that pushes back against them is their best friend in the long run -- because they keep them from making stupid mistakes and gaffes they don't see. If I were mayor, I'd want Micheal Mahoney as my PIO because I know he wouldn't let me get away with anything.

https://www.kmbc.com/news-team/4ed8e070 ... bdf52142e1

Platt acted immaturely in this entire debacle and it cost KC taxpayers almost $1 million.

Platt's mistake was not relying on Hernandez's years of relationships with other people in KC media. Hernandez probably knew journalists who would catch those lies and make a big story out of it, and he was seeking to avoid that from happening.

A PIO can smooth things over for public officials and refocus on their strengths and not their mistakes.

Hernandez also knows people in the neighborhoods and how things would fly. How misrepresenting things pisses them off, and how people like Belvidere spend time ferreting out discrepancies and mistruths.

Agreed. My opinion: Lucas didn't do that because Platt was doing exactly what he was hired to do. Lucas isn't dumb. Far from it. Because of the relationships I have now, I know things I would never put on this forum (as I am sure most of you avoid doing). It's public.

There are 2 more lawsuits in the pipeline. The city may appeal. I imagine they can offer Platt a buyout as well.

It's damaging and embarrassing.

3

Pre-trial phase and it's too big for me to opine on in here. You're welcome to FOIA the city managers emails from the month of January and February though if you're really interested. It'll stick out like a sore thumb.

[Belvidere]

Agreed. My opinion: Lucas didn't do that because Platt was doing exactly what he was hired to do. Lucas isn't dumb. Far from it. Because of the relationships I have now, I know things I would never put on this forum (as I am sure most of you avoid doing). It's public.

There are 2 more lawsuits in the pipeline. The city may appeal. I imagine they can offer Platt a buyout as well.

It's damaging and embarrassing.

3

Pre-trial phase and it's too big for me to opine on in here. You're welcome to FOIA the city managers emails from the month of January and February though if you're really interested. It'll stick out like a sore thumb.

Understood. Thanks.

[phuqueue]

But it's disingenuous to think that there is no violence on the streets either. And many people choose the streets because they want to choose to live in a lifestyle that is not allowed in a shelter. Allowing that to continue is inhumane. And just putting someone in an apartment so they can shoot up there instead of on the street is not a solution. We need to have both resources and accountability.

I mean, if we are identifying the problem as homelessness, then giving somebody a home is absolutely a solution, regardless of what they do in that home. Now you are experiencing mission creep, you've decided to try to solve drug use, not just homelessness. But this kind of moralizing has been the backbone of our collective response to homelessness for decades, and it's not working. To the extent that we can speak generally about such a diverse population, neither homelessness nor drug use is typically a root cause of somebody's problems, they are effects that in turn further exacerbate things. It is very difficult to kick a drug habit even under good circumstances, and homelessness is not a good circumstance. The stability of having a home can make it easier for people to turn their lives around, but making turning their lives around a precondition to getting a home is just setting them up for failure. Housing first policies have been shown to be more successful at reducing long-term homelessness than other models, and studies have found it's also better for reducing substance abuse. For what it's worth, housing first also costs less money. But this is all getting away from the original point a little bit though, which is that people don't "choose" homelessness and shouldn't be sent to jail just because they'd rather be on the street than in a mass shelter.

[KCKev]

You all are correct. It's a very tough problem. I talk to the homeless every day riding the bus. For many they don't want help because as stated they are drug users and it's like a religion for them. Brainwashed by the demon that is both those things. Its america damn it, let me live my life my way right or wrong.
I don't have a solution to this I just listen to them and their stories. Give them money if the speek the truth to me, and I am aware it's going to there drug habit most of the time.

[Chris Stritzel]

Donald Trump has been President again for almost 2 months at this point, and I'm just making a general observation. His Presidency has made people on both sides lose their collective minds. For context, I'm speaking from the very slight center-right of the political spectrum.

On the Hard Right, they're pissed that he's not completely ending all foreign aid to Ukraine or Israel or every single country where we might want to try and not leave allies hanging. The Hard Right is not pleased that the Administration is even trying to find an off-ramp with Ukraine and Russia to end that war. It's obvious they rather see Russia assume control over the entirety of Ukraine. The Hard Right is pissed at Amy Coney Barrett, a "Conservative" Trump-appointed Supreme Court Justice, because she apparently sided with John Roberts and the 3 "Liberal" Justices on some foreign aid issue and they want her kicked off the court for "being a traitor" and "adopting kids from Haiti". The Hard Right, and Religious Right, have also started to attack the few prominent Gay Republicans for living the lifestyles they live. See recent attacks on Scott Pressler and his partner by members of that community. The same Scott Pressler who takes great pride in registering new Republican voters in states like Pennsylvania and New Jersey is now seeing himself get attacked by the Hard Right, but he still does his work because he believes in it. But the optics of this means any chance at a "broad tent" is practically lost.

On the Hard Left, there are people torching and vandalizing Teslas owned by random Americans because they disagree with Elon Musk and his political adventures. These same people are also showing up, in small groups, outside some of Tesla showrooms to protest, but its obvious grandstanding. You can disapprove of the things Elon Musk is pushing for with DOGE or other things, but to vandalize and torch private property owned by random Americans as a way to show you disagree with Musk and the purchase of those random Americans is clearly designed to spread fear to those owners in a bid to force a sell off of Teslas and a wide-ranging boycott. The Hard Left has also taken the liberty to side with the super minority of people who want to bully Jewish people for being Jewish and wanting to abolish the Israeli and American States because of some supposed "occupation". Most Democrats don't agree with this, but the Hard Left has proceeded to act like this is an issue with majority support and are waltzing around like fools. Most recently, the defense of non-citizen Khalil likely being deported over his actions at Columbia University are not the smartest optics (an argument is being made by some that because he's a non-citizen, the Constitution does not apply to him and therefore he can be deported without 1st Amendment rights considerations).

The Anti-Semitism and pure hatred spewed by those on the Hard Left and Hard Right make these two groups despicable and represent the bottom-barrel of American politics.

Some members "Hard" sides of the political spectrum have taken to a platform, like Reddit (mostly Left) or X (mostly Right), to post veiled threats of assassination of either Trump or high-ranking Democrats. Calling for the death of someone because you dislike what they're doing is reprehensible.

Instead of working to shove these "Hard" sectors out the door to focus on an agenda that might have the support of a clear majority of Americans, the two parties are bending their knees to accommodate these people who really don't deserve a stage to stand on because the two parties only care about one thing: power. The two parties care less about the average American and a unified nation at this point. They're power hungry. This is causing things to become very heated, very quickly.

That little stunt with the Democrats at the joint-session of Congress sitting and looking sour the whole time as an act of protest - Laughable. Republicans going after Sarah McBride (a transgender congresswoman from Delaware) because of "preferred pronouns" and "bathrooms" - Idiotic. Donald Trump placing tariffs on countries for no reason and no apparent end goal, causing massive levels of uncertainty in the markets - Stupid.
Joe Biden apparently not hand signing a bunch of orders and pardons and instead using auto pen - Dumb.

The fact this country has devolved into a shit-show at the national politics level has left us exposed for our adversaries an open door to capitalize on our division. The Chinese, Russians, and Iranians see this as a huge weakness and they will play into this in a bid to further divide us. They want to see Americans focused entirely on our own differences and distracted by potential acts of domestic violence so that they can steamroll into Ukraine and the Baltics, take over Taiwan, and build a Nuke that can obliterate the Jewish state.

In my opinion, the obvious solution is to begin splitting the parties. It's likely we have 5 or 6 parties squashed into 2. The Hard Left, Democrats, Middle of the Road Independents, Libertarians, Republicans, and the Hard Right.

I understand that every 4 or 8 years, you see the transfer of power and if one party enters power, the opposing party always gets upset. They act like the sky is falling, that America is dying, Democracy won't exist anymore, the Constitution (which, lets be honest, the politicians don't care about this anymore) will be shredded, and the President will become a dictator. The Right was saying all these things when Joe Biden became President and the Left did this during the first Trump presidency and is doing it again in the second. I'm too young to know how the Obama years were, but my family says the Right was upset about that and the Left was upset at Bush become President.

Is this really the best we have? The greatest nation in the world and this is what we come up with? 250 years only for us to fall into lies told to divide us based on our politics, race, religion, gender, and where we live?

I am disgusted by all the so-called "leaders" in this country who sit around collecting a check and doing absolutely nothing worthwhile. But you see, going on a Fox, CNN, or MSNBC cable news show for soundbites and campaign ads is a good way to "stick it" to the opposition.

Moving forward, I'm practically done participating on anything political at the national level. If we want to make a difference in our community, vote for State and Local officials. What they do will be much more felt than what happens at the federal level (most of the time). Local and State leaders, no matter who they are, tend to not be such buffoons and show more of a willingness to listen and work to get things done.

If you read my whole rant, thanks. I appreciate it.

[beautyfromashes]

If you read my whole rant, thanks. I appreciate it.

Be careful trying to live in the middle, that's where the bullets fly and you're hated by everyone.

[Chris Stritzel]

If you read my whole rant, thanks. I appreciate it.

Be careful trying to live in the middle, that's where the bullets fly and you're hated by everyone.

Yeah, that’s the problem. I’ve gone to Democrat and Republican events and both have shunned away people like me. Democrats think I’m too socially Conservative and Republicans think I’m too socially Liberal. Leaves me in a tough place to choose a “political home”.

Too be honest, I’m more Libertarian than anything, but I don’t want to be associated with that Party since they have some real jewels there.

[KCKev]

Both parties have their bad actors just be a good and informed citizen ! You seem like a good guy yo me. I'm not into labels so party isn't really a factor to me but I do see troubling beliefs and a certain pattern in Republicans.

[Belvidere]

If you read my whole rant, thanks. I appreciate it.

Be careful trying to live in the middle, that's where the bullets fly and you're hated by everyone.

Yeah, that’s the problem. I’ve gone to Democrat and Republican events and both have shunned away people like me. Democrats think I’m too socially Conservative and Republicans think I’m too socially Liberal. Leaves me in a tough place to choose a “political home”.

Too be honest, I’m more Libertarian than anything, but I don’t want to be associated with that Party since they have some real jewels there.

This is unsolicited advice so take it for what it's worth:

Don't worry about what people think.

Find policies that you believe in, that you think will benefit yourself and society as a whole, with the current cautionary tale that it can't be false. I think a lot of traditional Republicans, and many of my relatives fit that mold, who don't understand what's going on, are not paying attention, and would be flabbergasted if they did. They may be conservative in their own home, but that's a far cry from passing laws to control other people or tell them what to do, or engaging in a culture war.

Any party is going to have extremists that you don't like or don't get on with. Nature of the beast. I invite anybody who thinks communism is going to solve everything to emigrate to such a country and figure out what it's actually like.

You're not going to find a home in a party. You're going to find a few people you trust and can work with, on things that matter to you. Just make sure you are not being used or deceived.